I oversimplified. EMs today are much different than 30 years ago when I was first immersed in the vocabulary of investing. Some, like China, are highly industrialized economies, global leaders in technology, and growing military powers. Much different from 30 years ago. EM economies differ greatly. Those rich in natural resources might better survive a global downtrend if the price of energy and precious metals remained high. I’ve noticed increased civil strife / unrest in some EMs - notably Latin America. That, coupled with often endemic government corruption works against investors.
Re: 2000. That was an unusual crash. Tech had been hyped out of sight. NADAQ toppled and led the other indexes (Dow, S&P) on the way down, even though those weren’t nearly as overvalued. I wasn’t aware EM held up better - but makes sense. It was well over a decade, I believe, before NASAQ ever regained its 5,000 level

I started to answer the above questions. But tossing in a term like forever really makes them undebatable. Infinity is a very long time. I’m told by scientists that given enough time, virtually anything can and will occur.
I am deeply concerned about #10. Wish this was a poli-sci or sociology class so we could explore that one. FWIW, my vague recollection from doing some Masters work in history back in the 70s is that Hitler, after coming to power, boosted the German economy for a number of years, through huge infrastructure spending and arms buildup. The frightening thing to me is that that was during the Depression and an outgrowth of it. Seems to be different reasons at work for the regression today (speaking more of Europe). Immigration looms large among people’s worries worldwide.

Honestly honestly honestly, and yes, I know it’s the next level of complexity for most people above individual stocks even (let alone equity and bond mutual funds)—I think preferred stocks could be an answer for many people. Especially if needing monthly, or steady but not necessarily monthly, income.
Yes many of the companies that issued these are not common stock SWAN investments, but keep in mind that preferred stock dividends HAVE to be paid before common stock dividends. So for many REITs and BDCs and CEFs and the like, it doesn’t matter how much their “common equity” dividend is, or how much it changes up or down, just that it IS paying a dividend, which these companies tend to do. And the preferred stock holder has to be paid before the common shareholders are paid (sorry for the repetition there).
Some examples of monthly paying preferred stocks (you buy them just like individual stocks, from a broker....most now don’t charge a commission to buy or sell!):
ARR-A: pays high 7% every month (a crappy mortgage REIT but just need it to continue to be a going concern to continue to pay)
ECCB/OXLCO: low-to-mid 7% every month (the common, ECC and OXLC, own CLOs and other Wild West type investments, and definitely have fleas, but same as above)
LANDP/GOODM/GAINM: all from companies managed by Gladstone something or other, and all pay 6% or better, monthly (similar parenthetical to ARR-A....though LAND is a farmland REIT, GOOD is a mixed property REIT, and GAIN is a BDC)
VER-F: pays high 6% monthly (keeps getting partially called, so there is a chance your share counts would slowly decline as the company is able to have the cash available to partially redeem the issue; VER is a middling triple net REIT that was a poor company in a past life)
Certainly these aren’t “can’t lose” investments, and there’s always chances that the issuing company goes belly up, and you have to deal with call risks, where the company buys the preferred shares back at par (generally $25), all of these are trading over $25 par price, and the prices definitely can fluctuate up and down a couple percent or more, based upon interest rate policies and market fears, but if you are interested in decent monthly income that you can count on during most economic times, preferreds are one solid option, in this posters humble opinion.
I dont mean ti redirect the thread (and I realize this is MFO, not preferred stock observer lol), so PM me if any more interest. Definitely not an expert in all the nuances of these securities, but visit several sites dealing with them, and have traded them for a few years. :)

All fund risk and return metrics, ratings, and analytics have been uploaded to MFO Premium, reflecting performance through November 2019.
We went live the morning of 10 December, which is typically the longest it takes. The first Saturday of the month, when Lipper (Refinitiv) drops the monthly data, occurred on the 7th.
The year-end data and attendant ratings should post the weekend of 4 January. It will mark the 60th year of Refinitiv’s database. How many funds have been around at least 60 years? Just 65. That’s right. Best absolute performer? T Rowe Price Small-Cap Stock (OTCFX) at 12.6% … per year! Or, how to turn $1,000 into $1,200,000.
The more interesting news is what went live on 24 December, including: Data Across Ten Decades, Allocation Indices, and Expanded Rolling Averages.
You can read more here.

Anyone seeking to play this?

Love the terminology. I do enjoy combining gaming with investing on those rare occasions where the deck is clearly stacked in my favor. Get in. Get out. Pocket what you can over a few months
(or possibly years) before the market wakes up to the obvious mispricing. Works best with sectors or specialty funds. A fund that’s down 40% in a single year or 30% a year over 3 years is generally worth placing such a bet on. However, scanning TRP’s 150 or so funds, I can see only one fund that’s even negative for 2019. That’s their Dynamic Global Bond fund (RPIEX) - off only about 1%. And looking at a the 3-year chart, all I see there is PRNEX - off slightly - which I already own.
Price isn’t the whole universe. But they have enough funds that I can usually spot major trends there. Nothing worth laying money on the table for IMO. I realize the type of investor Lewis is addressing is the one who exists somewhere in between the extremes of short-term speculator and long-term buy and hold investor. I like to think that that kind of gradual shift in/out of different areas based on relative valuations is something a good manager of allocation funds normally does. None of us can match the depth and breath of market knowledge Price’s global network of analysts is imbued with. (And many other managers as well) So, other than liking RPGAX a lot because the managers have some discretion in underweighting / overweighting different market components, I won’t be throwing money at emerging markets.

Despite high volatility at times, 1987 produced positive total returns in the S&P 500. The losers are the ones who sold and never got back in.

Agreed. And it's probably the same for 2000 and 2009. I know a few people who got seriously burned in 2009 and one or two still haven't recovered the confidence to return to the market. They will probably buy in again at the top....
This "reversion to the mean" concept is interesting. I think it has some major limitations today. And isn't "the mean" always fluid, always changing? What is "the mean" in today's world? As Old Skeet mentioned, P/E ratios are constantly expanding. I see no problem with that. I think value sectors will struggle again this coming decade because growth can be achieved very quickly and easily with the application of new technologies. You could wait 5 or 10 years for the reversion to the mean. Or it may never come at all.

Agreed their forecasts have been inaccurate of late, but I have been around long enough to know that wasn’t always the case, particularly in the post 1999 era when GMO’s predictions were spot on. It comes down to that terribly difficult question: When will valuations matter again? Or are we to presume the next ten years or in this case seven years will precisely mirror the previous seven? What is interesting is leading into the 2008 crash everything pretty much was overvalued. Now like in 1999 there is a real spread in valuations between one part of the global market and another. For those who believe valuations still matter and in the notion of “reversion to the mean” that presents some interesting arbitrage opportunities. The question that folks like Arnott and GMO always struggle with is they don’t know what will trigger the reversion. It has to be something major. Overvaluation alone is never the trigger.

In 12/31/2010 GMO 7 year forecasted US large cap would make 0.4% + 2.5% inflation = 2.9%. The SPY made over 14% annually (link).
Bogle was wrong about the SPY too and Arnott was very wrong and why PAUIX lagged badly.
Many experts were wrong in the last 10 years.

Over the years I have been using a high % in one of the following funds NHMAX ORNAX OPTAX PHMIX by using momentum.

@Crash, Could the current custodian of that 403(b) perform the initial rollover to an IRA? Whatever it’s now invested in would remain the same for that purpose. Once you’ve moved that money into a traditional IRA you should be able to perform IRA transfers to whatever custodian(s) you want. The IRAs can later easily be converted to Roths all together or in chunks.
That’s what I did with my 403(b) - which was already with TRP. Price was most helpful in facilitating that rollover. The funds I was invested in stayed the same. No money moved. Just a bit of paperwork. Later, I diversified away from Price into some other houses by doing simple IRA Transfers. Paperwork for an IRA transfer takes less than 15 minutes. Pretty basic. Just mail it in.
Changing from a 403(b) designation to IRA status would seem the important first step. Later, deciding which portions of the IRA to convert to Roths and how to time those conversions requires more foresight and planning on your part. The whole chunk doesn’t have to be converted at once. I found it simplest and most convenient to convert 100% of my holdings at different houses in 3 different years. It also allows you to pick the most opportune investments to convert at different times.
PS - In a 403 plan the employer controls it. In an IRA you have control. Big difference.
Just some ideas FWIW

Thanks, everyone. Wife will not have worked at all for pay between Oct 11th and December 31st, 2019. I'm not working at all, taking SS and pension. I'm 65, she's 46. My reference to "not making enough money from which to deduct contributions into Trad. IRA" is a throwback to my own situation a couple/few years ago. We file jointly. There have been 3 years, lately, when my Trad-IRA contributions were non-deductible. (So, I've stopped putting any money into it.) Not because we maxed-out to the IRS-declared legal deductible limit and went beyond it, but because there was not enough income to be TAXED. And late in 2019, we moved from Massachusetts to Hawaii.)
(My tax guy explained the procedure and percentages and steps and nonsense and crapola and bullshit re: exactly what kind of mathematical formula the IRS uses to let me get at that $7,000 total in non-deductible (and zero tax owed) contributions. Clearly, some Martian with 8 brain cells and both male and female genitalia and no experience at all on planet Earth came up with that idiotic gobbledigook.... Now that I'm of age, I COULD take out the non-taxable amount without penalty. But it can't be done simply by taking the $7,000.00, since that's the non-taxable total amount in the account. The IRS requires that it be done over time, in order to preserve the tax-free status of that full amount. M-I-C... K-E-Y....... M-O-U-S-E.)
So, I'm hearing great things from you all about the Roth.
Is it not possible to convert the 403b DIRECTLY and TOTALLY into a Roth? Maybe that IS possible, but for some arcane reason, should not be done? Because the conversion (of whatever amount) triggers a taxable event?
Note: together, we will be WAY below the 12% tax bracket's income limit. PLENTY of room, there. BUT: maybe converting the 403b entirely in a single year might be the difference between owing no tax at all, and owing SOME tax.
I'm re-reading my entry, here. I'm going to just finish here. I'm only going to add this, which is the same thing I've volunteered to say to some customer rage and aggravation agents (aka "customer service") on the phone, just today, in fact: NOTHING should be THIS complicated. :)

As far as I can tell the only share classes still open to new retail incur either a front or back-end load (which may be waived at certain brokerages) and well above average expenses. It's a good fund, make no mistake. But for those at T Rowe Price their own PRGSX is an excellent alternative and performance has been practically identical to PRJZX over the last 7 years with slightly better risk management.

Thanks for the input john. The new muni fund would be a small part of my portfolio. I have a large CG from AKREX in my taxable account that I plan to capture next year and buy the muni fund with that CG. I have set up my retirement to use saved cash to supplement my SS for a couple of years. I plan to be in the 0% tax bracket. This muni fund may be used to extend the cash allowing me to do some Roth conversions.

I'm not clear on the income/tax situation: "If she doesn't make enough money from which to deduct IRA contributions."
So let's start with the mechanics. First, as @Gary1952 said, don't take a taxable distribution. If you're going to pay taxes, you're better off rolling it into a Roth. All its future earnings will be tax free, as opposed to taxable in a taxable account.
The law allows rollover conversions directly from a 403(b) into a Roth IRA. This eliminates one step in the conversion process. But my limited experience in helping someone do this within TIAA suggests that the 403(b) administrators may not know what they're doing. (In that case, TIAA withheld state income taxes which they were not supposed to do.)
Instead, a direct rollover to a T-IRA will preserve your options to convert or not. If you should convert the IRA (or a portion) to a Roth, don't have taxes withheld, else the amount withheld will be treated as a taxable withdrawal. In addition, the conversion moneycannot be withdrawn penalty free for five years. Because your wife is (and will continue to be) under 59½ the conversion money will be subject to the usual 10% early withdrawal tax until it becomes a qualified distribution. That happens five years after the conversion.
Here's a short column discussing these two "traps":
https://www.irahelp.com/slottreport/roth-ira-conversion-10-penalty-trap
In some states (I don't remember which state you're in), some retirement distributions (including IRA withdrawals/conversions, pension plans, etc.) can be taken state-tax-free. This feature may be age-restricted. For example, Colorado exempts $20K of retirement income (including IRA withdrawals) for people aged 55-64, and $24K for seniors. So if you're thinking about converting the money, it might make more sense for you to convert part of your T-IRA (if any) rather than part of your wife's. Not to mention that you're closer to RMDs.
Page with table of how each state treats retirement income:
https://taxna.wolterskluwer.com/whole-ball-of-tax-2018/state-retirement-taxes
That gets us to whether it even makes sense to convert (which is effectively what you're doing if you do a direct rollover to a Roth). Not enough information to reasonably comment here, especially since I don't understand what you mean by "doesn't make enough money". Generally 100% of compensation can be contributed to T-IRAs (up to contribution limits, of course).
The 12% bracket that @bee mentioned calls to mind another consideration: 0% capital gains. If you keep your total taxable income under $78,750 (sic), then you cap gains are taxed at 0% by the IRS. Note that this limit is slightly different from the $78, 950 limit for the 12% ordinary income tax bracket (MFJ).
Too many considerations and too little information to comment intelligently about your conversion decision (which would be informational in any case and not constitute advice, as with all of this post).

Not too surprised by the performance on this one if you look at its collective PE and the top holdings. One heck of a run for growth stocks these past 10 years.

IMHO the Roth is the greatest thing since sliced bread (or cheese). For me, financially speaking, it’s “the gift that keeps on giving.” Great tips from @bee regarding tax-wise planning (an area I’m deficient in). Don’t overlook the benefit that, unlike traditional IRAs, the Roth is (normally) exempt from RMD requirements. As an “oldster” I appreciate that added flexibility.
Ideally, as with any kind of investment option, you like to “buy” low. While most any time is a pretty good time to convert (Traditional to Roth), if you can do it with under-appreciated (or underwater) assets, you stand to reap a larger measure of the Roth’s rewards. That in turn makes that initial tax hit look a lot less. Of course, this is to a degree based on good luck.
I did a conversion of global equity funds in March ‘09 and have never looked back. All smiles. Did another in January 2016 when most of the hype over PRPFX had faded and the fund had slid into disrepute. The hot money had left. Recent performance stunk. Caught a nice bounce with that one. No regrets. No sweat.
The third one (actually the second in sequence) in January, 2015 did not go as planned. I threw all of that conversion into a commodities fund at Oppenheimer I thought was ready for a bounce. Instead it tumbled further. Adding insult to injury, they shut the fund down while all my Roth money was still in it. At one point my “hypothetical” 10K Roth “investment“ was worth in the vicinity of 7K. Never despair. With a bit of help from Invesco/Oppenheimer’s precious metals and real estate funds, that “hypothetical” 10K Roth is now worth over $13,000 - less than 5 years after the conversion.
So, 2 out of 3 ain’t bad. And, even the one “miss” eventually turned around in time to salvage the converted amount.

As a new retiree I sure wish I had more in my Roth. The last 2 years of work I had a Roth option in the 401k and put as much as possible. Having said that I would try to get the Roth funded. I believe you will have to roll it into the equivalent IRA as the 403b. But you can convert in low tax years into Roth from TIRA. Future IRA contributions are a different matter than rolling over.
Do not redeem into taxable.

I have been using a % in HY Munis for years in one of the following funds NHMAX, OPTAX, ORNAX, PHMIX based on momentum.

This is a very well written article. Discusses the pros and cons of the energy market. It’s curious that the article is dated December 24. Oil (the commodity) has been moving higher for at least a month. Brent is leading NYMEX and topped-out at around $68 today. Was under $50 early in the year.
The refiners should have followed oil higher. The closest thing I own (to refiners) is PRNEX. It’s a natural resources fund, but traditionally keeps a heavy footprint in energy. Here’s the top holdings (from Morningstar):
Total SA
Linde PLC
Bp Plc, London
Air Products & Chemicals Inc
NextEra Energy Inc
TC Energy Corp
EOG Resources Inc
Concho Resources Inc
ConocoPhillips
RPM International Inc
With today’s .32% gain, PRNEX is now up close to 17% YTD. Most years that would be considered a nice return. However, with 30% & 40% gains in some other sectors, a mere 17% this year receives little respect.

@stillers - I pulled this off Fidelity's Fixed Income research site:
"Municipal bond volume will finish the year above $400 billion for the fourth time since 2010 and third time in the past four years.
“Considering how slow the year started, no one had that number or thought we would get there,” said one New York trader. “We were one pace for only about $330 billion six months in and then boom, all of a sudden all the taxables hit and here we are.”
The muni market saw $433.27 billion back in 2010, $444.79 billion in 2016, and a record high $448.61 billion in 2017.
“Expectations are high for next year volume wise,” he said. “Buyers should still be eager to buy munis as a true taxes safe haven, with principal, interest and callable bonds that should amplify demand as well. Munis are poised for another big year."
There are no deals on the calendar until the week of Jan. 6. The New York MTA is scheduled to sell $1.5 billion in two separate competitive sales on Monday, Jan. 6. They are then scheduled to jump back into the market on Thursday, Jan. 9 when the authority is expected to sell a total of $939.555 million of green bonds in three separate sales."